Can You Imagine the Dalai Lama Holding a Machine Gun?

Neither can I, but that's exactly what some are suggesting now that Tibet has been under Chinese occupation for over 50 years. A recent online article called for the Dalai Lama to end the campaign of non-violence in relation to the oppressive Chinese government:

It has been 51 years since the last most significant Tibetan uprising against Chinese rule. That’s a long time. In the ensuing years under the leadership of the 14th Dalai Lama the Tibetan people have chosen a non-violent protest against Chinese occupation. You don’t have to be a brain surgeon to know that this has not worked. In fact I am here to say it will NEVER work. This is because the non-violence advocated by the Dalai Lama has pacified the current Tibetan to the extent that the Chinese are now in firm control. Mix in some global politics and economics and you can say the Tibetan cause in its current format is utterly hopeless!

That is why it is now time for the Dalai Lama to renounce this non-violence and call for an armed struggle against the illegal Chinese occupation of Tibet. People who know me understand that I am a man of peace. However, as I’ve watched the failure of the Tibet cause in my lifetime, I am now convinced the Chinese will win, if something urgent is not done. While in the past I may have subscribed to the Ghandian view of non-violent struggle, when it comes to the Tibetan cause I am more along the line of the “Just War” position as advocated by St. Thomas Aquinas .

James: Never is a word of impatience because there could be a democratic revolution in China tomorrow and over-night the relationship between the Chinese and Tibet would change. Impatience is a desire to force delusions we have of how things should be if we had our way but being a trick of the mind, things never turn out the way we think they will and thus bring much suffering. Impatience is a lust for control, which is often disguised as a sincere concern but can can often backfire and just cause more suffering. For example, fanning the flames of an armed insurrection in Tibet could just harden the Chinese government and turn a public that quietly supports the cause of the Tibetan people into supporters of the state. Nothing unites a people more than a war.

Plus, how could the Tibetan people even have a chance in a fight against the jaws of the giant Chinese military machine? It would merely end in even more Tibetan deaths and the aftermath would be horrific to the cause. The Chinese would turn Tibet into a further military state and perhaps create a "final solution" for Tibet, which could easily include mass executions and an increased re-population of Tibet by ethnic Chinese.

Besides, if you think that the Dalai Lama is going to give up on non-violence then you really don't know much about him, nor about his religion. Besides being a leading voice in the world for peace today, he is first and foremost a simple monk. It would go against his vows as a Buddhist monk to renounce non-violence. And how could he send Tibetans into war yet not himself espouse violence? In fact, the very act of sending Tibetans into war would be one of violence. It is greedy to demand that one of the holiest men in Buddhism (and the world) call for blood-shed because you are frustrated and impatient that Tibetan freedom isn't coming fast enough. I can see the Dalai Lama smiling in response and calmly stating that none of us are truly free anyway.

Even if freedom was granted over-night there would still be a lot of misery and suffering within the newly independent state. There could be power struggles, corruption and your average crime. What I'm trying to say is that having democratic freedoms doesn't guarantee lasting happiness. There are many people in the world living with all kinds of freedom that are very unhappy. Freedom brings with it other problems such as rampant greed. The author of the opinion piece then gives their reasons for why they are calling for armed insurrection:

1. We’re running out of time – Tenzin Gyatso the current Dalai Lama is over 70 years old. He he is not going to live forever. Even if he lived another 20 years that is a limited time. Once he passes away the Communists in Beijing are going to put forth their own Dalai Lama who is more sympathetic to their cause. The Tibetan people will have their own. This split will be the final nail in the coffin for Tibetan independence. Right now there is unity. Never under-estimate the power of this unity.

James: To assume that the Tibetan people wouldn't relate more to their Dalai Lama seems a bit hyperbolic to me. The Dalai Lama is a central pillar in what makes up Tibetan culture, and to think that they would bow to the Chinese fraud of a Dalai Lama doesn't give the Tibetan Buddhists much credit for their tenacity at maintaining their religion in the face of oppression. Besides, it's not about Tenzin Gyatso himself, so much as it is about the essence of a Dalai Lama. Tenzin Gyatso is just the current version of that essence. Tibetans aren't going to disregard their century long traditions of finding the new incarnation of the Dalai Lama and trust the Chinese "methods." Tibetans of all people know that everything is impermanent and that was the case with their long hidden civilization when the Chinese took over but the other side of impermanence is that eventually China's power will wane too.

And it is important to note that there is a strong and growing Tibetan diaspora in India and beyond, which has brought a lot of attention to Tibetan culture, Buddhism and it's political cause. That attention has brought many countries onto the side of the Tibetan people. Isn't it better for the Tibetans to live within places like India or American or Europe, etc. where the allowance of other cultures and religions maintains and grows their culture instead of wiping out the Tibetans that are left in an armed insurrection? We all want freedom for Tibet but forcing it through violence runs contrary to everything the Dalai Lama and Tibetan Buddhism teaches. So you're not only asking them to go to war against one of the biggest militaries in the world, you're asking them to betray their beliefs in the process:

2. Non-violence only works with liberal democracies – Every non-violent movement cites Gandhi’s success in securing independence from Britain. We now have over 50 years of analysis to figure out why it worked. The answer is simple. It worked because of Britain. I’m not excusing British imperialism or exploits of the sub-continent. All I’m saying is because Britain was a well established liberal democracy you could appeal to its citizenry on moral grounds. You can’t do that when you’re dealing with a violent communist regime like China. (Same goes for the Burmese struggle too.) China is not a liberal democracy. You can not appeal to its citizenry on the basis of compassion and morality. China is gearing up for world domination. It has cash, it has energy, it has enthusiasm. The communist regime will not do anything to give the impression it is weak. And granting anything to Tibet would be perceived as weakness. It will not relent to some pesky monk in a robe preaching.

James: How does this author know that the Chinese people aren't sympathetic to the Tibetan cause, and that they aren't compassionate, moral people? Throughout history it has often been the case that the people under a dictatorship are good, just people who are just as much victims of their government as the Tibetan people are!! And once again, they are assuming that the Chinese people won't rise up themselves against their government. As I said before, a Tibetan uprising could unite the people behind their government at a time when western philosophy and Buddhism are on the rise within the silent majority in China. Why push them into the hands of the oppressor by igniting a war?

And in the end, a country isn't anything but an attachment to an institution that we think is going to make us happy, prevent us from suffering and helping us succeed. Yet here in America, (which is supposed to be the beacon of democracy) we are in a current state of absolute corruption. Our government is owned by the corporations, and is increasingly disenfranchising the people who are increasingly poor and unhealthy.

And being an American I have an up close view of what war does and does not do. Unfortunately America has a lot of experience with war and "liberating" people. After fighting in Iraq for 6 years now, the best we can say about it was that we created a barely stable yet highly corrupt government. And in Afghanistan we are stuck in a perpetual war, with no end in sight. I'm not saying that war should never be used but I believe it should be used very sparingly because while war can bring some good, it can and always does bring unexpected problems. And I'm not trying to say that Tibetans shouldn't be able to decide for themselves if they want a war because that's their right. However, to say that the Dalai Lama, (who is considered by many to be an incarnation of a Buddhist saint of compassion) should push a war is unrealistic. And finally, it's easy to talk tough and call for war when you're not the one who has to fight that war. Of course that's assuming this individual isn't Tibetan or unwilling to fight but I didn't read anywhere in the article that the author would lead the charge or fight in the ranks.

PHOTO CREDIT: The Dalai Lama arrives at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver. AP Photo/Jonathan Hayward, The Canadian Press.

~Peace to all beings~

Buddhist Community Outraged Over Demon Beating Incident.

Both parents of a 3-year-old southwest Harris County boy beat him with bamboo sticks and poked his feet with chopsticks in a violent attempt to remove demons from his body, a prosecutor said Tuesday in a court hearing. Assistant Harris County District Attorney Darin Darby, citing a witness statement from the boy’s 6-year-old sister, on Tuesday presented new details of the attack on Saturday to state District Judge Debbie Mantooth Stricklin in the case against Phung Tran, 36.

She and her husband, Jacky Tran, 35, are charged with injury to a child with serious bodily injury, a first-degree felony. He was arrested on Saturday. His wife was charged on Monday. Both face up to life in prison if convicted. Prosecutors say the parents, Buddhists and vegetarians, believed demons entered the boy through meat he ate.

HOUSTON – Houston’s Vietnamese and Buddhist communities are outraged over what they claim is a distortion of their religious beliefs. "We don't want to be looked upon as sharing the same kind of beliefs and actions as that man. Everybody condemns that action," Vu Thanh Thuy of Radio Saigon Houston said.

The Vietnam Buddhist Center in Sugar Land also condemns Tran’s actions. They wanted to make it clear that Buddhism does not teach anything about removing demons, especially at the painful expense of another human’s life. "I think he has a problem with his mind. I don't think it has got anything to do with religion," Lien Tu of the Vietnam Buddhist Center said. In fact, the major landmark at the Vietnam Buddhist Center is a 720-foot tall statue of the Bodhi Safa. In Buddhism, this is the goddess of peace and mercy, which is the opposite of the religious claims being made in the case of Jacky Tran.

The communities want to send the message that Buddhism is about alleviating suffering, not causing it, especially when it comes to a helpless 3-year-old boy.

James: It is my view that demons aren't real and that they are better understood as parts of our illusory self. In other words we all have Buddha nature but demon nature as well. Buddha taught us that we must take ownership of our ill fortunes and realize we are our own saviors and demons. We must take responsibility for our actions and problems--not conveniently shift the blame onto some invented bogeyman.

"By oneself, indeed, is evil done; by oneself is one defiled. By oneself is evil left undone; by oneself, indeed, is one purified. Purity and impurity depend on oneself. No one purifies another." (Dhammapada, chapter 12, verse 165).

I've said this before but personally I find belief in demons to be dangerous as people can justify just about anything in the name of fighting an amorphous, unverifiable "demon." Such beliefs can too easily lead to placing our focus and attention outside of ourselves and allow us to blame our weaknesses, mistakes and problems on this idea of demons, which in many ways has become a scapegoat for a rampant ego. Now, I'm not saying that believing in demons always leads to this kind of behavior and if you believe demons are real and beneficial to your practice and are otherwise a very peaceful, non-violent, reasonable being than I have no quarrel with you.

As for this particular case we can clearly see that they are not practicing Buddhism but rather a very perverted, twisted and deranged immitation. In the first place vegetarianism isn't mandatory in Buddhism but second I want to know where the 3 year old got meat from if the parents were vegetarian? The main thing that I wanted to underline with this post is that Buddhism does NOT teach violence and is often seen as the most peaceful religion on Earth today. Of course there will be wackos who do this kind of stuff and try to call themselves Buddhists but that does not take away from the underlying message of Buddhism, which is peace, non-violence, love, respect and kindness.

---End of Transmission---

Some Burmese Monks Take up Arms.

The Dalai Lama has said repeatedly that war is an outdated policy but some Buddhist monks in Burma aren't listening to His Holiness nor their senior monks. They are tired of peaceful protests and want to take up arms (weapons).

Rangoon, Burma -- If Ashin Zawta has his way, the next time the government of Burma (Myanmar) clamps down on dissent it will have to deal with a new force: monks with guns. "Last September the Army proved too powerful for us and defeated our nonviolent tactics," says the young monk, whose real name, like those of other activists in this story, has been changed for security reasons. "We need weapons. That is the only way we can bring down this regime."

James: This is troubling news in my mind because monks have traditionally been pacifists and urged waring parties to put down guns instead of picking them up. War is a disturbing reality in this world of samsara but it is the practice of those who are not monks though war should be avoided at all costs by everyone if possible. The Sangha is where many lay followers turn too for spiritual guidance in troubled times such as in Burma. The monks are to be examples of the power of peace and non-violence which is the inheritance of all monks from Buddha.

However, that gift is lost and lineage tarnished once monks embrace their anger so fully that they are willing to kill. Can a monk shooting guns still consider himself a monk? I say no. Look at the example of the Dalai Lama and Thich Nhat Hanh. The Dalai Lama never condones violence to resist the Chinese oppression in Tibet as it only breeds more violence and suffering. Thich Nhat Hanh was hated by both sides in the Vietnam war because he refused to side with Americans nor the Communists. He opposed violence from all sides.

How can we solve and reduce violence as Buddhists committed to non-violence (especially ordained monks who take additional vows from the laity) when our Buddhist leaders and teachers take up weapons despite teaching us non-monks to practice non-violence as taught by Buddha? It would be tragic to see robed monks shooting bullets in the streets of Burma. I hope they retake refuge in Buddha and not in the desire of revenge which only causes more suffering for all involved.

~Peace to all beings~